Edward Davey: I am announcing today that I intend to repeal shortly the regulations on extending the right to request flexible working to parents of 17-year-olds that were laid before Parliament on 16 December 2010 and that were due to come into force on the 6 April 2011.
	The Government remain committed to extending the right to request flexible working to all employees in due course. We will consult on this extension later in the spring.
	The Government are constantly listening to the views of all stakeholders including business, and it has recently become clear that this small extension to the flexible working regulations could be an unhelpful complication at this important point in the UK's economic recovery when employers need to focus on growth and creating jobs. We therefore intend to repeal these regulations, which will also avoid multiple changes to the flexible working regulations over the coming years.

Andrew Robathan: I regret to inform the House that an answer I gave in response to a supplementary question about nuclear test veterans from the hon. Member for Scunthorpe (Nic Dakin) during Defence oral questions on 31 January 2011, Official Report, column 573, could have been misleading. I said:
	"the courts have found there is no causal link whatever between many of the disabilities and illnesses suffered and any exposure to radiation".
	This statement could have been open to interpretation and I wrote to the hon. Member for Scunthorpe in response to a letter from him to clarify the position on 23 February. I also mentioned this to him when we met on 1 March. The position is that the Court of Appeal judgment in the Atomic Veterans Group litigation granted the Ministry of Defence's appeal on limitation, not on causation. However, as part of this judgment, the Court said that the claimants have produced no evidence which begins to satisfy those usual causation requirements and that the general merits of the claims were extremely weak.

Mark Harper: The Government have established an independent Commission to investigate the creation of a UK Bill of Rights, fulfilling a commitment made in our programme for government. The Commission will explore a range of issues surrounding human rights law in the UK and will also play an advisory role on our continuing work to press for reform of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
	The UK will be pressing for significant reform of the European Court of Human Rights, building on the reform process underway in the lead up to our Chairmanship of the Council of Europe later this year. We will be pressing in particular to reinforce the principle that states rather than the European Court of Human Rights have the primary responsibility for protecting convention rights.
	The Commission will be chaired by Sir Leigh Lewis KCB, a former permanent secretary at the Department for Work and Pensions with a long career in public service. He will be joined on the Commission by: Jonathan Fisher QC, Martin Howe QC, Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws QC, Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC, Philippe Sands QC, Anthony Speaight QC, Professor Sir David Edward QC and Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky.
	The terms of reference for the Commission are:
	The Commission will investigate the creation of a UK Bill of Rights that incorporates and builds on all our obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, ensures that these rights continue to be enshrined in UK law, and protects and extend our liberties. It will examine the operation and implementation of these obligations, and consider ways to promote a better understanding of the true scope of these obligations and liberties. It should provide interim advice to the Government on the ongoing Interlaken process to reform the Strasbourg Court ahead of and following the UK's Chairmanship of the Council of Europe. It should consult, including with the public, judiciary and devolved Administrations and legislatures, and aim to report no later than by the end of 2012".
	The Commission members have, between them, extensive legal expertise and experience, and we expect the Commission to take into account a broad range of views as it fulfils its remit. In addition, an advisory panel will be established to provide advice and expertise to the Commission on issues arising in relation to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Commission will report jointly to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Justice. The Commission will be supported in its work by a small secretariat of civil servants.

Caroline Spelman: The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs and the devolved Administrations are publishing the UK Marine Policy Statement (MPS). I am placing copies in the House Libraries.
	The MPS forms a key element of the coalition Government's programme for implementing the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (the Act). The MPS is UK-wide and has been developed jointly with officials in the devolved Administrations. The Act provides for the introduction of marine planning in UK waters for the first time and the MPS is the first step in this new marine planning system.
	The MPS is defined by the requirements placed on it by the Act with the overall aim of contributing to the achievement of sustainable development. The MPS is the decision-making framework for the UK marine area and guides the development of marine plans and marine licensing decisions across the UK. The aim of the MPS is to ensure the necessary consistency and coherence across the UK in the way we manage our seas, while providing the flexibility for marine plans to reflect the characteristics and needs of different marine areas. The MPS therefore covers all major activities and sectors in our seas from renewable energy to nature conservation and from fishing to tourism. It sets the policy context and direction in each of these areas and the considerations that must be given to each activity in the development of marine plans or when decisions that may affect the marine area are taken. By bringing together the wealth of policy objectives for the marine area, and by setting out in one place the breadth of the legislation that exists for the marine environment, the MPS will provide clarity for regulators, developers and all those with an interest in our marine environment, a clarity which will be built on with the development and adoption of marine plans.
	The draft MPS was laid in Parliament on 21 July 2010 and the final version takes on board comments made during parliamentary scrutiny. In accordance with the Act, we have produced a document summarising the differences between the draft consultation version of the MPS and the final version being published today.
	The MPS was developed with an appraisal of sustainability (incorporating a strategic environmental assessment). A post-adoption statement has been published in accordance with the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) directive explaining how sustainability considerations have been integrated into the MPS. In addition to these documents, the MPS is supported by a habitats regulations assessment, an equality impact assessment screening report and an impact assessment. The documents have taken into account comments from stakeholders, especially during public consultation last year.
	Published copies of the MPS, the post-adoption statement and the document summarising the differences between the draft and final versions of the MPS will be placed in the House Libraries. Electronic copies of these documents are available of the official documents website: http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/. The other documents can be found on the DEFRA website: www.defra.gov.uk.
	My Department also published a description of the marine planning system for England. This document, together with the MPS, represents a package of action that the Government are taking to improve the management of our seas.

Anne Milton: I am today publishing the Government's response to the public consultation on access to the national health service by foreign nationals that was issued by the previous Administration before the election.
	The NHS is built on the principle that it provides a comprehensive service, based on clinical need, not the ability to pay. However, it is not free of charge to all comers. Legislation dating back to 1977 permits persons who are not ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom to be charged for NHS services and subsequent regulations, first introduced in 1982, impose a charging regime in respect of hospital treatment.
	The charging regime provides for some categories of non-residents to be exempt from charges, and international agreements provide reciprocal healthcare that benefits visitors from and to participant countries. It also takes full account of humanitarian obligations in the provision of healthcare, in particular ensuring that the emergency medical needs of any person are treated irrespective of their status or ability to pay.
	The consultation was based on a limited review of access and charging policy. After considering the responses we received the Government have decided to take forward their main proposals, specifically to lay the new consolidated charging regulations including the specific changes that were consulted on:
	extend the time UK residents can spend abroad without losing automatic entitlement to free hospital treatment from three months to six months;
	allow failed asylum seekers who are on UK Border Agency support schemes for families or because there is a barrier to their immediate return, to continue to receive free hospital treatment (but retain charges for those other failed asylum seekers who refuse to return home); and
	guarantee the provision of free hospital treatment for unaccompanied children while under local authority care.
	In addition, we are taking this opportunity to introduce a limited term exemption for Olympic and Paralympic games competitors and officials in line with a commitment made in our successful 2005 bid, and to amend the trigger for exempting charges for pandemic flu treatment to protect public health.
	We also support the Home Office's plan to introduce proportionate immigration sanctions on overseas visitors who refuse to pay appropriate charges for treatment provided. The Department will therefore introduce measures to enable data-sharing with the Home Office to support this while guaranteeing necessary data privacy standards.
	However, it is increasingly clear that the overall charging regime is neither balanced nor efficient. Overall entitlement to free healthcare, through residency or other qualifying exemptions is often more generous to visitors and short-term residents than is reciprocated for UK citizens seeking treatment in many other countries. Charging regulations only cover hospital treatment, so visitors may receive free primary care and other non-hospital based healthcare services. Although hospitals have a statutory duty to enforce the regulations, effective enforcement by hospitals appears to vary considerably.
	For these reasons we believe that a further fundamental review of the current policy is needed. The review will include:
	qualifying residency criteria for free treatment;
	the full range of other current criteria that exempt particular services or visitors from charges for their treatment;
	whether visitors should be charged for GP services and other NHS services outside of hospitals;
	establishing more effective and efficient processes across the NHS to screen for eligibility and to make and recover charges; and
	whether to introduce a requirement for health insurance tied to visas.
	Access for European Union residents is determined by separate EU regulations. The review will not consider changes to these regulations.
	The review will respect the NHS's core values and its obligations to provide urgent treatment, as well as the need to protect public health and observe international agreements. Denying necessary access to any person or group is not an option. We will consider the full benefits and costs of introducing new charges including risks of deterred or delayed treatment and any other societal costs. It will be informed by exploring equivalent policies in other health economies and we will seek views and input from NHS managers and other interested parties. The scope of options is deliberately wide-ranging and we do not want to rule individual changes in or out pending this further evaluation. The proposals will be the subject of a full public consultation on completion of the review.
	The Government's response to the consultation has been placed in the Library. Copies are available to hon. Members from the Vote Office and to noble Lords from the printed Paper Office.

"Refusing Entry or Stay to NHS Debtors"

Damian Green: I have today published a report detailing the Government's response to the public consultation "Refusing entry or stay to NHS debtors" conducted by the UK Border Agency between February and June last year. The consultation sought views on a proposal to amend the UK's immigration rules so that those subject to immigration control who fail to pay treatment charges made by the national health service under the relevant charging regulations for overseas visitors will normally be refused further leave to enter or remain. It also covered associated arrangements for the national health service to notify the UK Border Agency of relevant non-payments. The Under-Secretary of State for Health, my hon. Friend the Member for Guildford (Anne Milton), who is responsible for public health, is also publishing today a consultation report detailing the response to a separate Department of Health public consultation on changes to the NHS charging regulations in England.
	We have carefully considered the response to the UK Border Agency consultation, which was generally supportive of the proposals, and have decided to implement the proposed change to the immigration rules in October this year. Those who fail to discharge debts to the NHS of or in excess of ,(£1,000 will normally be refused by the UK Border Agency if they seek further permission to enter or remain in the country.
	Copies of the response document will be placed in the Library of the House.

Norman Baker: I am today announcing the final tranche of payments from the Urban Congestion Performance Fund that will see the 10 largest urban areas in England receive a further £3.75 million to address the causes of urban congestion.
	These payments are the final payments made through the fund, which is linked to the local congestion targets set by the 10 largest urban areas in England in their local transport plans.
	The £3.75 million payment will be shared between the participating areas as below:
	
		
			 Urban Area Sum to be paid via Tranche 4 
			 London £1,125,000 
			 Greater Manchester £470,364 
			 West Midlands £438,727 
			 West Yorkshire £382,600 
			 South Yorkshire £300,752 
			 Tyne & Wear £252,049 
			 Merseyside £320,892 
			 Nottingham £155,890 
			 West of England (Bristol) £154,869 
			 Leicester £148,857 
			   
			 Total £3,750,000